I have been putting a fair amount of effort into avoiding the news for the past few days. I was moderately interested in the facts emerging in the Sheppard case that I will henceforth refer to as "The Shitstorm". But halfway through the day on Tuesday, when a reporter called my work looking for my coworker who had written something on facebook to the effect of "RIP Al", I realized that the media circus was just that, and that nothing good was going to come of reading any articles whose contents were researched with only slightly more diligence than the ignorant reader comments that inevitably follow.
The courier was drunk.
Bryant is an asshole.
I couldn't really give a fuck.
God damn it, why couldn't it have been a 60 year-old commuter and a middle aged woman who killed him? You know, like that guy who was doored into traffic last year with little or no fanfare? Or a 15 year-old kid and an old chinese lady, like the woman killed by the sidewalk cyclist? Why couldn't both parties involved just be non-descript residents of the city of Toronto, so that The Shitstorm could remain in some way, shape or form about the events that transpired instead of sensationalized headlines to sell papers and polarize the community?
Could The Shitstorm be any more perfect, really? Rich, powerful, public figure driving a car vs. broke, marginalized, slave-wage-earner riding a bike, and for this reason we will forever more be arguing who the real victim was. This is not about cyclists and drivers. This is not about the proletariat and the bourgoisie. This is not about the celebrity and the anonymous. This is about the rules of engagement.
And unlike fight club, there is only one rule. There are no rules.
Urban cyclists, especially courier types (I include myself under this umbrella), seem to pride themselves on their ability to ride defensively and expect the unexpected, because cars do not behave in a predictable manner. However the last statement is not entirely accurate because cars do not behave in any manner at all, it is their human pilots that are unpredictable. And to think that a driver (or cyclist for that matter) will behave any more predictably or rationally when engaged in an argument is a dangerous proposition indeed.
Perhaps I have less sympathy for Sheppard than the average cyclist, having found myself being beaten by a group of five or so men two months ago, half a block from the spot where he was killed, as a result of my own need to escalate an argument with a jaywalking pedestrian. I fucked with the wrong guy, and I paid for it.
And I cannot help but think that Sheppard's last thought, having no idea who Michael Bryant was, the position of power he held, or the ease with which he will likely escape any consequence for his actions, was much the same: I fucked with the wrong guy.
So please, let's just not fuck with each other at all. It isn't worth it. That Michael Douglas Falling Down glamourized hollywood confrontation you have in your head where you show the motorist who's boss isn't going to happen (in real life fights are a lot less noisy and a lot more painful). And if it does, and ends in your favour, you are probably going to jail.
So let it go.
Please just let it go.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Well said, Andrew - my sentiments pretty much exactly.
Well said Andrew. Let's all just take care of one another.
Definitely a sober and grounded examination, not to mention solid practical advice. But I have to say that, individual engagements acknowledged, we really should broaden our examination to the repetition, again and again, of the same situation involving different individuals; surely there is something systemic behind the continued iteration of similar incidents and emotions.
Personally, I don't think the media would have been any more 'accurate' in its reportage if it were just two run-o-the-mill Onians, even if it were to be less sensationalist. And I think in the newspapers you would still see the same 'discussion': drivers writing for drivers ABOUT this phenomenon of cyclists. And you know, while I don't disagree with anything you say, and certainly wouldn't advocate giving in to the heat of the moment, I do think the way our media works and the way popular opinion operates actually does have a lot to do with individual engagements.
This will probably be the most biased thing I'll say, but I really do believe that drivers actually would be less aggressive if the Star weren't constantly reminding them how justified they are. And I do believe that if we had separated bike lanes (a 'systemic' change), not only would fewer such incidents arise, but mutual animosity between drivers and cyclists would just generally ease significantly.
Great writing, man. I like the new Dandyhorse piece, too!
Post a Comment